robotwarsfandomcom-20200215-history
User talk:Obi-Have
The Arena Hi Matt, It's RA2 here. Wikia is actuing up on my computer. The arena page is broken for me, I can see everything - albeit all the menus and sidebars are broken - but I can't post. Also it appears that I can't log in, so hopefully you will take my word that I am RA2 - ask me anything and I'll answer it if that's what it takes to prove it to you. I don't want you to worry yourself over trying to fix it, but since I can't post my thoughts could you do me a favour and copy my votes verbatim into the appropriate boxes? (It doesn't have to be Matt btw, I'll be equally appreciative if someone else sees this first and takes care of it). Razer vs Tornado (Razer wins): What can I say? This is why I had no qualms with the anti-razer cage, because without it we'd just be watching the same fight we saw twice before, and Team Tornado would be doing a great disservice their fans if they withheld their own chances of turning the tides. This should set a precedent for a new rule, that the host of a fantasy torunament is allowed to changed the seeindgs or defy randomization if it leads to a bad lineup. But anyways, none of that is here or there; Razer wins easily. Supernova vs Diotoir (Supernova wins): I hate having to do this, but I'm afraid the buck stops here for Diotoir. Diotoir never, and I mean NEVER proved that it could stand up to a real destructive weapon - look at its combat record, virtually all of its losses are to flippers. Supernova as we know is a "rattler" and not a slasher, that is, its teeth are blunted, which means a lot less chance of snagging fur and damaging the mechanism. Tornado broke Diotoir's scoop without much effort, and Supernova is too slippy and not compact enough to get trapped in Diotoir's wedge. With its big flat sides, Diotoir is vulnerable to really getting hurt from the shocks of Supernova's disc. Either an electronic bit or a wheel axle will give under Supernova's barrage. 15:45, April 5, 2012 (UTC) Thanks again, and let me reiterate that I am in fact RA2. :I know it's you RA2, I recognise your style of writing, and have added your votes. Matt Talk to me 16:09, April 5, 2012 (UTC) ::Thanks for covering for me Matt. The problem appears to be isolated to my work computer, which is a relief, but at the same time a royal pain since it makes me effectively not here between 1 and 9 PM GMT. Also, my ability to edit waned and waxed throughout the day, in hindsight I was very lucky to get that random window of opportunity. I'll probably have to enlist your help again. Would it be cool if I set up a Google Doc and posted stuff there? The burden comes from that someone would have to check on it, but I try to post soon after you put the new round up https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IIw2MVxcmcNhqwElQh136uLpFJkRKud-hgqBlBMSy9M/edit Here is the link. It's set up so that anyone can view but only I can edit. Thanks so much. RA2; aka Resetti's Replicas. (My Talk) 22:56, April 5, 2012 (UTC) :::It's fine, I'll keep on checking. Matt Talk to me 08:23, April 6, 2012 (UTC) Chat Moderator I would like to say before hand that I do not intend to sound boisterous or glory hunting as I say this, however I fear it may come out that way. You are the current official Chat Moderator for this wiki, however, your level of commitment towards this role has been minimal in recent months. Snowdog140 and I have been discussing, and we would both like to jointly apply to take on the role of Chat Moderator(s). We both feel that we would be suitable for this job, as we are both regularly on the chat, so we are aware of every discussion that takes place publicly on this wiki. We have been actively involved in several of the recent discussions taking place that reflect the future of the wiki. The fact that there are two of us will mean that if one is absent, the other can pass on any important information missed by the other on. I have come to you on your talk page, since there isn't really an application page for this, and it's only fair if we run it by you first. Thanks for listening, we would both appreciate a response back from you. Datovidny (talk) 22:31, April 8, 2012 (UTC) :I'll add my contribution too. Datovidny and I discussed this at length, and we feel that between us we can make a positive difference here. Now that I am working from home and I am actually on chat for most of the day, and at least one of us is here in the evening, so a moderator presence would pretty much always be felt. While I'm happy to say that there have only been a few times where a moderator may possibly be required, one of us as always been there, as well as to talk to some of the newer members of the community: Ricky Roby, the return of Badnik96, and ToastUltimatum, although of course he is now a fully fledged member. Datovidny of course used the chat feature to great effect when organising the quiz, so him being given such a promotion would be a fair reflection to the very positive attitude and contribution he brings to the wiki. Of course we are committed to maintaining our own high personal standards of work towards the community, and we both feel that the Chat is a very important feature, so to have some kind of essentially constant presence is something that needs to be at least considered. Hopefully you will agree with us that this will be another improvement to an already successful feature. Charlie M 21:43, April 8, 2012 (UTC) ::I certainly see why you both are applying for this role, and I'm aware that you both spend much more time on chat than I do. I would not at all be unwilling to promote both of you to Chat Moderator, but I will wait until the middle of next week to promote you both, in case anyone else wishes to make their voice heard, if no-one does, consider yourselves promoted. Matt Talk to me 22:03, April 8, 2012 (UTC) :::I see no harm in having a couple more chat moderators, as I don't think the admins spend much time on chat these days, and I have no problem with the two users who have applied being given the powers. Christophee (talk) 14:02, April 9, 2012 (UTC) ::::Seeing as no-one has objected, I've promoted you both, congratulations. Matt Talk to me 15:42, April 12, 2012 (UTC) Audited Series 5 Hi Matt. I just wanted to ask you a favour. If possible, from the semi-finals onward of the Audited Series 5, could you please wait for me to add my vote, assuming I don't take too long. Obviously if I'm not around for a couple of days and you want to move it on, then go ahead, but I was hoping you could give me a bit of extra time to add my votes in the latter stages of the tournament. Also, do you have any plans to update the main page. It's your month, but if you're too busy then I'm sure someone else will be happy to do it for you. Christophee (talk) 14:11, April 9, 2012 (UTC) Also, one more thing. It seems that Middle Eye had no idea he was no longer an Arena judge until someone told him recently on Chat. I totally understand why you replaced him, but you really should have let him know. Christophee (talk) 17:03, April 9, 2012 (UTC) :All three are my fault, and I apologise. I misjudged the precise length of time that ME was intending to take out, I presumed too much. I'm sorry for being impatient, I tend to move on after around 10 votes, instead of waiting for certain people, but will certainly wait for you in the future. Been meaning to update the main page, will do it now. Apologies again. Matt Talk to me 17:28, April 9, 2012 (UTC) ::No need to apologise. I don't mind that you moved on some of the heats before I was able to vote. It's my fault for not getting there in time. I just wanted to make a special request that you wait for me during the latter stages. Don't feel you need to wait for me in future tournaments though. Christophee (talk) 01:01, April 10, 2012 (UTC) Future Competitions I was about to add another idea of my own to the list of Competition Ideas onto the Forum:Discussion page, but then I was thinking that a lot of the ideas on the page are quite outdated, and one or two have been used, as well as that, the talk of the Redemption Championship being unpopular is still at the top. Would it be a good idea to completely refresh the page? Datovidny (talk) 18:17, April 9, 2012 (UTC) :I'm on it. Matt Talk to me 17:24, April 9, 2012 (UTC) Regarding the Arena Hey there Matt. Just to let you know, I won't be around for a couple of days, hopefully tops. My room is being refurbished, and that means I won't have access to the computer. It does mean I won't be able to contribute to the Arena, but don't worry about me. I'll be back as soon as I can. CrashBash (talk) 22:07, April 10, 2012 (UTC) :OK, thanks for the heads up. Matt Talk to me 22:17, April 10, 2012 (UTC) ::Are we just going to have the commentator decide in the event of a tie, or should we recruit another judge? I think it would be a good idea to give Middle Eye his job back while CrashBash is gone. [[User:ToastUltimatum|'Toast']][[User talk:ToastUltimatum|'Ultimatum']] 18:33, April 11, 2012 (UTC) :::In the event of a tie, even amongst the judge's the commentators vote is the casting one. Matt Talk to me 18:34, April 11, 2012 (UTC) ::::At the moment it's not a problem as none of the votes are tied, but one vote for Razer completely turns that battle around. Christophee (talk) 00:51, April 12, 2012 (UTC) Alternate Heat Winners When we get to Series 3 onwards, are you planning to keep the draws the same as they were in the real series, wherever possible, or are you going to randomise it? If it was me, I would try to keep the draws the same. I'm not sure whether this would be possible for Series 2 though, as you can't plan for which robots will go out in the Gauntlet and Trial. Also, I've decided not to take part so far because I don't like big melees or non-battle events in the Arena forums, but I will probably start contributing when we reach the Arena stage of Series 2. Christophee (talk) 00:07, April 25, 2012 (UTC) :I've done a mock up of the line up for the next five series semi finals in my Sandbox. Do they look good? Madlooney 11:55, April 25, 2012 (UTC) ::Very good, but I think Series 6 Semi-Final 1 should still be 1 vs 2, 3 vs Losers Melee. The only reason it wasn't was because the winner of Battle 3 had already faced the winner of the losers melee, so they swapped. CrashBash (talk) 15:24, April 25, 2012 (UTC) :::Hi everyone. Yes I do intend to keep the draws the same, with the exception of Series 2. Thanks Looney for doing that for me, if you could just modify it as CrashBash has suggested, that would be a very useful aid. Matt Talk to me 15:47, April 25, 2012 (UTC) :::Modified it. Madlooney 17:00, April 25, 2012 (UTC) I've realised that I don't remember Series 2 well enough to comment on it, so I'll start contributing when we get to Series 3. I'm just letting you know in case you were ever going to wait for me. Christophee (talk) 00:10, April 26, 2012 (UTC) 2012 Summer Trivia Quiz Hello, as you are a regular user to this wiki, I want to inform you that the 2012 Summer Trivia Quiz will be hosted on the chat feature of the wiki by me on the 23rd June at 3pm (British Time). I wish to tell you in advance so that you can try and set aside some time for it, it is estimated to go on for about an hour. If you wish to learn more about this, look on my blog for more details. If you know you can't make it, please let me know, I should remind you about this again nearer to the time. Datovidny (talk) 18:57, April 29, 2012 (UTC) The Arena Hi, you told me to let you know if I felt that any of the response on the Arena forum weren't enough, and unfortunately it's yours that I'm having a bit of a qualm with. I noticed this on the Alternate Series 3 when you voted on the Napalm fights, but I let it slide. However, on Series 4 Semi-Final 1 I'm not convinced by three of your answers. You're simply putting that "Robot X is better, end of story", which to my mind doesn't have the sufficient logic that the rules of the Arena require. Please do not take this as a personal attack as there are likely to be other examples (and knowing me I am probably guilty too), but if you're running the tournament and voting first I'd like to think a precedent should be set which would encourage active debate. snowdog140 16:58, May 9, 2012 (UTC) :No, I take no offence at all, I hope that my new elaborations are more to your satisfaction. Matt Talk to me 18:03, May 9, 2012 (UTC) ::More than, so thank you. I'll take this opportunity to add that I intend to have the trial pages done by the end of the weekend, now my major exam is done. snowdog140 19:31, May 9, 2012 (UTC) Alternate Heat Winners Hey, I have a question regarding the "Alternate Heat Winners" thing we're currently doing. Are we going to do the international domestic titles as well? I mean, doing the first US series or the German series would admittedly pretty much be pointless, but there's still the 2nd US series and both Dutch series that we could potentially do. Although the main problem for the latter would be sorting out the wildcards...I think, however, it could be done if we did the robot that had immediately beaten or lost to the robot that received the wildcard (in other words, Lizzard would be replaced by either Bamm Bamm or Arena Killer for S1, whilst for S2, Meshuggah would be replaced by either Lizzard or Lethal Swan, Twister by Philipper 2 or Impact, and Bamm Bamm by Flepser). But that's only if you decide to do it. CrashBash (talk) 15:36, June 21, 2012 (UTC) :I think it's more trouble than it's worth to be honest, the competition hasn't proved hugely popular. Matt Talk to me 17:15, June 21, 2012 (UTC) Proposal regarding War of the Weapons Oh, hey there. Me again. I was just thinking about our War of the Weapons tournament, and it kinda got me thinking...how do you intend to set up the heat? Do you intend to try the first round melees again (which we've had a few problems with before), or are you going to try a heat like Dutch Series 1, with three knockouts and a losers melee? It would certainly be interesting and even different. Just curious. CrashBash (talk) 06:36, July 11, 2012 (UTC) :I'd be ok with eliminators if we do them by the old method, which is to just have each person make a level 3 header in the section called "(Name)'s Thoughts." The problem with battles where more than one robot qualifies, is that people end up getting their arguments muddled-up when they try to write something separate in each of the qualifying robots' sections - or they just post all their thoughts in one section and say "See (first robot)" in the other. RA2; aka Resetti's Replicas. (My Talk) 15:12, July 11, 2012 (UTC) ::I don't think we should ever have to go back to the days of "User's Thoughts", the new format is just generally more advanced, better looking, and easy to use. As these are three-way melees, we can potentially just place one vote in the section of the robot that would instead be eliminated, even though this may look slightly confusing and unappealing. Both methods have flaws in this respect, as three-way melees have the issues we've just covered, but one-on-one battles means we have to use Losers' Melees, which make for just one battle to vote on, rather than the usual multiple. [[User:ToastUltimatum|'Toast']][[User talk:ToastUltimatum|'Ultimatum']] 15:24, July 11, 2012 (UTC) :::I intend to do it as usual, but I think the idea of choosing a robot to eliminate is the best option, although not ideal, as it offers potential for people to form their argument properly. Matt Talk to me 15:29, July 11, 2012 (UTC) I'm sorry.... ....but I wasn't able to leave my votes for the heat-semis of WOTW because I've been having a really severe connection problem that I can't understand what's wrong....all I know is that the light besides "DSL" on my Wi-Fi Router keeps going out, taking the internet with it....plus, it is also taking over 10 minutes to load just ONE page....so if I don't reply, you'll know what's happened. CrashBash (talk) 17:21, July 23, 2012 (UTC) :So sorry to hear that CrashBash, I'm also suffering technical problems with my laptop (possible hard disk failure), but at least the internet over here works. Hopefully your problem will be fixed soon. STORM II 17:25, July 23, 2012 (UTC) ::No problem CrashBash, it happens to all of us. Computer's can be so temperamental... Matt Talk to me 17:26, July 23, 2012 (UTC)